If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Oakland may lose 80 officers at midnight

Found this to be an interesting read. Many of us on this board will likely see that it's clearly mismanagment of funds when this kind of thing happens, but you can bet Cali's gooberment will say it's the unfunded liabilities that are crippling their ability to keep Police and Fire services up to par.

I guess this is when the good people of a city must raise a militia for the security of their free state?

That is what sensible people would do, but we're talking about Oakland Ca. The entire bay is filled to the brim with apathetic victim mindsetted idiots. Oakland has been a dangerous city with nearly useless police (they're a clean up crew who won't issue carry permits) as long as I've been alive, and I'm sure it will ownly get worse as the economy spirals into oblivion. Anyone who lives around there or knows someone who does has at least heard of numerous muggings, something that rarely happens around here, because criminals know they might get shot.

Going by the stupidity of the region, as well as the Kansas City Experiment's findings that #'s of cops on the street don't effect crime, my guess is that this won't change much. People keep themselves and their friends and family safe, or brutal police states keep a lot of criminals scared. Neither are going to become a matter of routine in the bay. Crime will likely to continue to rise as the economy falls, just like it would have with twice the number of oakland JBT's.

That is what sensible people would do, but we're talking about Oakland Ca. The entire bay is filled to the brim with apathetic victim mindsetted idiots. Oakland has been a dangerous city with nearly useless police (they're a clean up crew who won't issue carry permits) as long as I've been alive, and I'm sure it will ownly get worse as the economy spirals into oblivion. Anyone who lives around there or knows someone who does has at least heard of numerous muggings, something that rarely happens around here, because criminals know they might get shot.

Going by the stupidity of the region, as well as the Kansas City Experiment's findings that #'s of cops on the street don't effect crime, my guess is that this won't change much. People keep themselves and their friends and family safe, or brutal police states keep a lot of criminals scared. Neither are going to become a matter of routine in the bay. Crime will likely to continue to rise as the economy falls, just like it would have with twice the number of oakland JBT's.

I do not concur. Loose the officers, and let the riots thin the herd. Then, reinstate the officers.

Yes, I know that's not viable. Too many honest, law-abiding citizens live in Oakland. Then again, it shouldn't take a school bus or a stretch limo more than thirty or forty minutes to remove them from the city limits...

Police have no legal duty to protect individuals.
Police have no legal liability when they fail to protect individuals.
Police have virtually no physical ability to protect individuals.

When you're in danger RIGHT NOW, protect YOURSELF or don't get protected AT ALL.

The odds of any person being "protected" as an individual by Oakland PD when they really need it are no lower minus those 80 cops than if they ADDED 80.

Interesting assessment and one I can respectfully concur with as our police departments have become strictly reactive and are no longer preventive in any way...at least that's the bulk of the appearance at this point.

I do this a lot, so I hope you all don't mind my doing it here.

Reference the emboldened line from the quote. This needs to be on a t-shirt!

If you look at the numbers, more officers ACTUALLY correlate to substantial RISES in crime...

There are approximately 3 times more sworn officers per thousand citizens today than the US had in 1950.

Crime in the US was relatively stable (per 1000) from WWII- the late 1960s, but then began an ever-increasing climb hrough the 1970's, and peaked in the mid 2000's. Violent crime has actually been DECLINING in most regions for the last 2 or 3 years (with a few notable exceptions--mostly in "sanctuary" cities and southern border counties)

During that same period, there was a steady increase in the number of sworn officers, but there was a spike in LE hiring in the mid-90's and again in the early 2000's.

Of course, the delightful thing about statistics is that correlation DOES NOT equal causation...

During that same period, from 1970-2009, the importation of automobiles from Japan grew exponentially, so by the same logic, one could argue that more Toyotas cause more crime. (and judging from what I've seen on the DC beltway, there may be some truth to that...)

During that same period, circumcisions of American male infants has dropped off significantly. So perhaps intact foreskins actually cause more crime.

During that same period, mortgage-holders increased as more and more people bought their own houses. So perhaps increased interaction with Loan Officers causes crime. (well, this is pretty much a given, but you get the point...)

During that time, the shift in terms of the majority percentage of GDP from consumer good to the production of military hardware nearly flip-flopped. So perhaps it is working in factories that build military equipment that causes crime.

During that time, the nation-wide demand for bacon has dropped dramatically, and the demand for "organic" food has skyrocketed. So perhaps "healthy" eating causes more crime. (it's all the fault of those hippies!)

What it all comes down to is that the NUMBER of cops on the street has little if any real affect on the number of crimes committed, because these two events are NOT directly related in any meaningful way.

What causes increases in crime is poverty, the disintegration of the family structure, lack of upright morals with regards to child rearing, and the disconnection (in families, schools, and entertainment) between actions and consequences.

When children are allowed to run amok as children, grow up in a culture that agrandizes drugs, crime, and entitlement, and are PUNISHED for excellence and honesty and rewarded for mediocrity and laziness, increased crime is pretty much a "gimme".

If you look at the numbers, more officers ACTUALLY correlate to substantial RISES in crime...

There are approximately 3 times more sworn officers per thousand citizens today than the US had in 1950.

When children are allowed to run amok as children, grow up in a culture that agrandizes drugs, crime, and entitlement, and are PUNISHED for excellence and honesty and rewarded for mediocrity and laziness, increased crime is pretty much a "gimme".

One of main reasons for the increase in officers since the 1960's, is the increase in call volume (not necessarily the rise in crime). Since the 1970's, police have become the social workers and conflict resolution personnel for a broken society. Much of the work cops do today, they would never do 40-50 years ago. If cops dealt strictly with crime investigation, crime prevention (patrol), and traffic enforcement, and didn't deal with family spats, disobedient children, neighbor spats, barking dogs, etc, we wouldn't need half as many as we have.

Unfortunately, somewhere along the line, someone decided it was our job, and now society seems to demand it.

If LEAs all over the nation weren't having to pay out tens of millions of dollars in Federal Civil Rights suits settlements EVERY YEAR, perhaps they wouldn't be so broke...

Officer Nassan, the fellow discussed in another thread about the situation in Pittsburgh PA, has cost the State of PA nearly $30 million in settlements and court fees in the last 7 years. And that's just ONE State trooper in PA. Estimates for settlements involving other PaSP civil rights violations could be near one hundreds million dollars over the last decade.

The City of Oakland has handed out tens of millions of dollars in settlements in the last decade, and the recent BART shooting case will probably end up costing them another 8 figures in civil settlements.

In a SINGLE ruling in Chicago in February of this year, the city paid out a settlement of $700,000. And recently ex-Chicago Poice Commissioner Jon Burge was found guilty of covering up several incidences of torture of suspects, which will probably lead to even MORE settlements. The total tally for settlements for the last decade in Chicago has been over $20 Million. And that's JUST Chicago--that doesnt include the rest of Cook County, or the State...

The State of MD has paid out well over $100,000,000 (That's ONE HUNDRED MILLION) in the last decade in police misconduct settlements, if you combine MSP and all the local and county agencies. Howard County PD is currently involved in a $50 million suit where they are alleged to have beaten, falsely imprisoned, and violated the civil rights of a 23-year-old man. His sister and 12 other witnesses corroborate the victims allegations and his sister recorded the incident on her cell phone (it remains to be seen if SHE will be charged with felony wiretapping for daring to record police officers in the line of duty in MD)

So perhaps what we need to do to save some money is NOT lay off random police officers to save money, but CLEAN HOUSE, and permanently fire the officers and administrators that are causing these huge hemorrhages--of money, of trust, and of the blood of innocent citizens onto the streets of our once-fine nation...

November is coming up quickly. It is your DUTY as a responsible citizen to vote out ANY incumbents who have been involved in covering up these sorts of cases. Sheriffs, City Managers, Mayors, Council Members, Aldermen, State AGs--ANYONE who has defended this sort of misconduct needs to be CALLED OUT in November, and shown the door.

The new people you vote in may be no different, but at least it will be a NEW set of crooks in office, and it will make it more difficult for them to continue their collusion, falsification of evidence, and judicial conspiracies to cover up these activities.

And THAT will be a REAL step toward making our streets safer for sure...

Last edited by Dreamer; 07-18-2010 at 09:55 PM.

It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash." --Barry Goldwater, 1964

In a SINGLE ruling in Chicago in February of this year, the city paid out a settlement of $700,000. And recently ex-Chicago Poice Commissioner Jon Burge was found guilty of covering up several incidences of torture of suspects, which will probably lead to even MORE settlements.

COMMANDER, not "commissioner".

You left out the murder of Michael Pleasance by Officer (now Detective!) Alvin Weems, captured on transit authority security cameras. He's on the hook along with the city for $12.5 million:

The entire City of Chicago is a criminal syndicate, and should be charged under RICO statutes. This does not surprise me.

I've been saying this for years. The idea that other people are starting to think this warms the cockles of my heart...

It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggression—and this is hogwash." --Barry Goldwater, 1964